Only a matter of time...

[Jonny Suave Trousers]

I honestly think with all of the near misses etc lately it is only a matter of time before Australia blemishes its copybook.

Landing aborted seconds from runway | Travel News | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/story/0,28318,26324412-5014090,00.html)

I find it quite disturbing that Qantas are yet again in the news for the wrong reasons. You can blame ATC, but what was the crew doing on late finals when the runway wasnt cleared?

I suppose the one positive is at least it wasnt a Toulouse Tree Trimmer involved.

Discuss.

[PJ2]

JST;
I find it quite disturbing that Qantas are yet again in the news for the wrong reasons. You can blame ATC, but what was the crew doing on late finals when the runway wasnt cleared?
You're very quick to convict on flimsy information. You obviously don't fly transports operating out of large busy airports.

[Jonny Suave Trousers]

Are you saying my opinion isn't relevant because I don't fly "heavy transports operating out of large busy airports"?

[twiggs]

Landing aborted due to runway congestion

Posted 45 minutes ago
Map: Tullamarine 3043 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/maps/map.htm?lat=-37.7119&long=144.8727&caption=Tullamarine%203043)A Qantas plane was forced to abandon its landing due to congrestion on the runway at Melbourne Airport this morning.
The pilots of the 747 flying from Los Angeles were asked to fly around the airport as it was making its final approach.
The plane circled the airport before landing without incident.


ABC news (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/09/2737225.htm)

Not only a non-newsworthy event but they can't even get the spelling right.
Congrestion?

[Kenneth]

I think what he's trying to say is: Another "non event" Beaten up by the media.
We are luck it dosn't read: "Aircraft conducts its own missed approach as pilots too busy on facebook to land"

[Fragnasty]

Yes, your opinion is irrelevant.

It is not uncommon for ATC to issue a late landing clearance if the runway is occupied for whatever reason. The expectation is that the runway will be cleared in time for a landing, and if not, a 'go-round' will be instructed. ATC telling the crew to expect a late clearance gives them an indication that they may need to go-round, and they will prepare accordingly.

As an aside, go-rounds / missed approached can be flown from much lower altitudes, so having to do this from 400 feet or so just about gives you time for a cuppa first.

So, in summation - the system worked just as it is supposed to when the runway is occupied, the aircraft landed safely, and everyone went home for tea and medals.

This is a total non-story.

Choice bro'!

[Watchdog]

HELLO.....JST.....HELLO.....

Like the journo who wrote the article, you seem to have NFI either!

Guess what....that's what is meant to happen if the runway isn't clear! :ugh:

[gutso-blundo]

No Johnny,
It just seems that by the tone of your post that your mind is already made up that QF are in the wrong.
Fair enough if you want to ask a genuine question, just be mindful that how you ask it can give away any alterior motive you may have.

[DirectAnywhere]

Are you saying my opinion isn't relevant because I don't fly "heavy transports operating out of large busy airports"?

Yup.

It's quite common to be on late finals with the runway still occupied. About 200' is the latest I've got a clearance in Australia.

In the US and UK you generally get your landing clearance with the runway still occupied. I can't remember or be bothered to find the exact wording from the state AIP but it's standard operating procedures.

A go-around due to the runway being occupied is a complete and utter non-event.

AT least the PPRuNe community is starting to get jack of these threads (see the responses above (and below now!!)). Any chance we can get this thread locked as well?:E

[Dark Knight]

Are you saying my opinion isn't relevant because I don't fly "heavy transports operating out of large busy airports"?Yep!

with all of the near misses etc latelyWhere, When & how many? Support the allegation with some facts.

what was the crew doing on late finals when the runway wasnt cleared?
Illustrates you do not really have much of an idea about what the real & true world of aviation is all about.....
Just two examples: LAX & LHR one often finds oneself almost `crossing the fence' whilst the preceding landing aircraft is only just exiting the runway.

Sounds though it may be just another bleeding heart, refugee advocate or climate change believer spouting Bullsh!te as fact!!

DK

[framer]

I honestly think with all of the near misses etc lately it is only a matter of time before Australia blemishes its copybook.

JST, with all due respect, as a regular passenger who's employed in the media , what you 'honestly think' doesn't carry much weight.This is because you don't know the ins and outs of the industry and aviation safety well. As an example, you seem to imply that this was a 'near miss' when it is nothing of the sort. It happens on a regular basis to all airlines. I think the last time for me was in Auckland. Basically what happens is that ATC are doing a bit of a juggling act. On one hand they want to get maximum utilization of the runway, and on the other they need to keep the aircraft separated. They do this through judgement and experience. Sometimes they get it wrong, or sometimes the a/c involved make it hard for them by either sitting on the runway longer than expected or flying faster than expected.The "go-round" maneuver is not an emergency proceedure, it is a normal proceedure. At 400ft the 747 would have been in excess of 30 secs from touch down......imagine being 30 secs from a collision in your car......not very scary is it, especially when you just have to take simple avoiding action to prevent it. Airline pilots are not phased by events such as this and would probably not even mention it to the wife on arrival home.


I find it quite disturbing that Qantas are yet again in the news for the wrong reasons.
Me too. Tell me what you think those reasons are JST? Because the event is certainly not news worthy. I find it disturbing because it is a rubbish piece and most people who read it will assume that it is a real issue.
There are some real safety issues emerging in the industry, why don't you try and find out what they are and bring them to peoples attention instead of non-events like this?
I honestly think with all the crappy reporting lately that it is only a matter of time before Australia is removed from the International Press Organization.

[Bullethead]

Sounds like it could've been caused by a slower preceding aircraft that didn't manage to clear the runway in time.

BFD! It happens occasionally. It's has happened to me several times over the years.

And JST I'll add my YUP!

Regards,
BH.

[Keg]

Your opinion is irrelevant because your other statements demonstrate that you clearly have no clear about aviation and the manner in which it's conducted. Had your comments indicated that you have a half a clue then perhaps your opinion may carry more weight.

However, given that you obviously have no clue AND are too clueless to realise that you have no clue then the fact that you even asked the question demonstrates in another way why your opinion on the matter is entirely irrelevant.

A go around in safe manouever and can occur for about 739 different reasons. 730 of these reasons are common, normal and an 'expected' part of airline operations.

Fair dinkum I wish that PPRUNE would start ensuring that people who registered were in fact part of the profession rather than being ignorant fools. It'll never happen (and nor do I expect the hard working mods to assess each person registering) but threads like this defy logic, good sense and reason.

[Di_Vosh]

But where are the interviews of the passengers "I thought I was going to die", etc. :8 :} :}

[Fragnasty]

what was the crew doing on late finals when the runway wasnt cleared?

Well obviously, they were playing golf.

What a load of ****e JST. Are you sure you're not really Johnny Fartpants from Viz magazine?

Choice bro'!

[Di_Vosh]

If you read the readers comments in the Herald Sun article, you'll see that MOST of the readers agree with the posters here (JST excluded) that this is a complete beat-up and shouldn't have been reported.

So maybe the public are getting a bit sick of QF bashing??

[tail wheel]

Unbelievable the ABC would publish a news article about a totally normal aviation operation! Surely they can't be serious? :confused:

Yes, it is Only a matter of time... before I either send this thread to JetBlast - or simply lock the thread as a total non event? :confused:

[Pinky the pilot]

Jet Blast has enough irrelevant rubbish on it already Taily.

[Icarus53]

Close it up TW.

Although I am just bored enough to sit here and watch the mud fly as the real aviators take these visitors to pieces, there's never any real satisfaction.

Can't we badge these guys with a troll or clown icon or something? I'm sure most of us would be willing to chip in some $$ to have this bloke and the other idiots with a suitable identifying feature?:ouch::}

[Worrals in the wilds]

Could you please lock it? Sending it to Jetblast only reinforces the opinion down there that DG&P is full of oafs and illiterates and gives us a worse name than we have already :}. It's not even amusingly bad.

As a non flying PPruNer, I find this type of drivel particularly annoying because it gives all us 'associate member' types a bad name, witness Keg's post (not that I disagree with it, in this instance). It's not even full moon this week, why the rash of 'wannabe journo' crap threads? I suppose it's a style kids see in our esteemed :yuk: newspapers and think it's the way to sound informed.

[Keg]

Perhaps Johnny should listen to some of his own advice (http://www.pprune.org/5164726-post12.html):

I don't often post here as you know as I am Media/SLF and would get carpeted by the prof pilots here.

:rolleyes:

Worrals, sorry to tar you with the same brush. Too often recently have foolish, ignorant, imbecilic wannabes made PPRUNE a less than enjoyable place to be. Of course I welcome input from those 'outside' the industry for all they can contribute to the discussion as long as they're contributing to it and not being a foolish, ignorant or an imbecilic wannabe. :ok:

[tail wheel]

Yes ... the options should have been to lock it ... or bin it where it belongs! :}

But I'll lock it in the hope no one else seems the ABC news headlines and decides to start another useless thread! :ugh:

* CLICK *